Criminal Law

I-E

Prof. Arreza

People vs Gonzales People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appelle, vs. Fausta Gonzales, Augusto Gonzales, Custodio Gonzales Sr., Nerio Gonzales, and Rogelio Lanida, accused; Custodio Gonzales Sr., accusedappellant
Doctrine: The commission of a felony under Art. 3 of the Revised Penal Code requires that an act a punishable act or omission must be committed, and that it must be committed with deceit and/or fault. Keywords: murder, felony, criminal intent, credibility of witness Nature: Appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeals Date: March 19, 1990 Ponente: Justice Sarmiento Facts: The appellant is appealing to the court regarding his participation in the killing of a certain Loly Penacerrada. He claims that he did not participate in the killing based on the claim that he was not present in the said act. The antecedent facts are as follows: - At around 9:00 p.m. of February 21, 1981, Bartolome Paja, barangay captain of Brgy. Tipacla, Ajuy, Iloilo, was awakened by two of the accused (Augusto and Fausta). Paja learns that Fausta killed their landlord, Lloyd Penacerrada, and would like to surrender to authorities. Knife used in killing was seen, and blood was found smeared on Faustas dress. - Paja immediately ordered a nephew to take spouses to the police at the Municipal Hall in Poblacon, Ajay, where the couple informed the police on duty of the incident. - Several patrolmen, along with Paja and Augusto proceeded to the residence at Sitio Nabitasan where the killing incident allegedly occurred, and found the body of the deceased, clad in underwear, sprawled face down inside the bedroom. - Group stayed for an hour in which the scene was inspected, and a rough sketch of the area was made. - The next day, a patrolman, accompanied by a photographer, went back to the scene for further investigations. Fausta was brought back to the police station. - The autopsy of the deceased was performed at 11:20 a.m. Report shows the following: o Sixteen wounds: five fatal as they penetrated the internal organs o Multiple puncture, stab, incision, and lacerated wounds - The day after the autopsy, Augusto appeared before the sub-station and voluntarily surrendered to Police Corporal Sazon for detention and protective custody for having been involved in the killing of the deceased. Augusto requests to be taken to where Fausta was already detained. Based on the investigations conducted, an information for murder dated August 26, 1981, was filed by the Provincial Fiscal of Iloilo against the spouses. However, they pleaded not guilty. Before the trial, however, a certain Jose Huntoria presented himself to the wife of the deceased. Huntoria claims to be a witness of the killing, and on October 6, 1981, volunteers as a witness for the prosecution. A reinvestigation of the case was called, in which several more were filed as accused, including the appellant. All the accused except for Lenida pleaded not guilty.

Criminal Law

I-E

Prof. Arreza

At the trial, the prosecution presented Dr. Jesus Rojas, the physician who conducted the autopsy on the body, Paja, the patrolmen and constabulary members who joined in the investigation, the widow, and Huntoria. Dr. Rojas testified that he performed the autopsy at around 11:20 a.m. on Feb. 1981 after the deceased was taken to the municipal hall. He found 4 puncture wounds, 7 stab wounds, 4 incisions, and 1 laceration; five of these were fatal wounds. Rojas admitted one of two possibilities: - Only one weapon might have caused all the wounds - Multiple instruments were used due to the number and different characteristics The brunt of the prosecutions case rested on Huntorias alleged eyewitness account of the incident, which was as follows: - Testified on July 27, 1982; at 5 pm on Feb. 21, 1981, he left his work at Brgy. Central, and walked home, taking a short-cut. - While passing at the vicinity of the Gonzales spouses home at around 8:00 pm, he heard cries for help. Curiosity prompted him to approach the place where the shouts were from. - 15-20 m away from the scene, he hid himself behind a clump of banana trees, and saw all the accused ganging upon the deceased near a threshing platform. He said he clearly recognized all the accused as the place was awash in moonlight. - After stabbing and hacking the victim, the accused lifted his body and carried it to the house. Huntoria then left home. Upon reaching his house, he related what he saw to his wife and mother before going to sleep. - Eight months after the incident, bothered by his conscience and the fact that his father was a tenant of the deceased, he thought of helping the widow. Out of his own volition, he travelled to the widows houise, and related to her what he saw. Except Fausta who admitted killing the deceased as he was trying to rape her, the rest denied participation in the crime. The appellant claimed that he was asleep in his house which was one kilometre away from the scene of the crime, and he knew of the crime only when his grandchildren went to his house that night. The trial court disregarded the version of the defense; it believed the prosecutions version. On appeal to the Court of Appeals, the appellant contended that the trial court erred in convicting him on the basis of the testimony of the lone witness, and in not appreciating his defense of alibi. The Court found no merit in the errors, and rejected defense of alibi. Worsening this is that the appellate court found the sentence erroneous, and upgraded the penalty to that of murderreclusion temporal/death. The case is now brought upon certification by the Court of Appeals, hence the appeal. Issue(s): Whether or not the client, under the evidence presented, has committed the felony of murder. Held: No, he has not. Ratio: Courts analysis of the evidence: - Investigation conducted left much to be desired. Centeno gave the date of commission as March 21, 1981. The sketch made was troubling, as it did not effectively indicate the extent of the blood stains in the scenes of crime. This would have added a lot of weight to any one of the versi - ons of the incident.

Criminal Law -

I-E

Prof. Arreza

Sazon, who claimed that Gonzales surrendered to him, failed to state clearly the reason for the surrender. It may even be possible that Augusto surrendered just so he could be safe from the victims kin. Sazon also admitted that Augusto never mentioned to him the participation of other persons in the killing. Rojas statement showed two possibilities for the killing. Faustas admission that she was the only killer is plausible. Furthermore, there were only five fatal wounds, which will be discussed later. Huntorias testimony, of which the prosecutions argument solely rests, needs to be examined further. Huntorias claims in his testimony did not exactly match with those from his cross-examination. He first claimed that he recognized the people involved. However, in the cross-examination, he only saw flashes. This implies that he may not have recognized anyone at all.

As such, Huntorias testimony could not place a definite act committed or contributed by the appellant in the killing of the deceased. On the criminal liability of the appellant: - There is nothing in the findings or the evidence that establishes the criminal liability of the appellant as a principal for direct participation under Art. 17, para. 1 of the Revised Penal Code. - Furthermore, there is nothing in the findings or evidence that inculpates him by inducement, under paragraph 2 of the same article. Based on the definition of felonies in Art. 3 of the Revised Penal Code, the prosecutions evidence could not establish intent nor fault. Recall that the elements of felonies include: o An act or omission o Act or omission must be punishable o Act is performed or omission incurred by deceit or fault - The lone witness could not properly establish any acts or omissions done by the appellant. He stated that he does not know who hacked or stabbed the victim, thus implying that he does not know what the appellant did. With this, the essential elements of felonies may not even be present. - Furthermore, the fact that there were five stab wounds and six accused would imply that one of them may not have caused a grave wound (especially given the statement of the physician). This may have been the appellant, and given that there is no evidence that the appellant caused any of the wounds, coupled with the prosecutions failure to prove the presence of conspiracy (that is, how many people actually took part in the killing), it weakens the arguments against the appellant. On the lone witness: - Huntorias credibility as a witness is tarnished by two points: o He came out eight months after the killing. He claims that he feared for his life, but there was no proof that he was being threatened, nor was the length of time reasonable given the circumstances. o He is not exactly a disinterested/neutral witness. He admitted to being a tenant of the deceased, and stated that one of the reasons why he testified was because the victim was his landlord. - Under our socioeconomic set-up, a tenant owes the source of his livelihood from his landlord. As such, they would do everything to get the landlords to their favour. Posing as a

Criminal Law

I-E

Prof. Arreza

witness would have been a convenient way to do this, especially as he ceased to be employed as early as May 1981. Finally, based on Philippine customs and traditions, it is unlikely for the appellant to be in the scene of the crime, as under our family culture, aging parents are usually sheltered and insulated from possible harm. It is improbable for the accused to bring their aging father when they were clearly in better shape than he was, and it was unlikely for the appellant to offer his services as they were more or less enough to handle what could have been a perceived enemy. Although alibi is a weak defense, in cases like this where the participation of the appellant is not clear, it may be considered. In light of the evidence on record, it may be sufficient for an acquittal. Decision of the CA is reversed and set aside. Appellant acquitted. Costs de officio.

Prepared by Antonio Miguel Bartolome